tim@isrnix.UUCP (07/07/83)
SOVIET CHEATING
In a recent column Evans and Novak repeated charges that the
Soviets have cheated on arms agreements. Such charges have been
made repeatedly in the past. However a joint statement by the
Defense Dept., State Dept., CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff
states: "Soviet compliance performance under 14 arms control
agreements signed since 1959 has been good." The SALT I agreement
established the Standing Consultative Commission in which both
the US and the USSR can bring questions about arms compliance.
In 1981 the US Commissioner of this Commission stated "The SCC
has never yet had to deal with a case of real or apparently
clear and substantial noncompliance with an existing agreement."
Then what about all the allegations that the "Soviets have cheated"
on past arms agreements? The State Dept. issued a report dealing
with various questions brought by both the US and the USSR to the
SCC. In 3 cases of possible Soviet cheating further US intelligence
revealed that there were no violations involved, in one case
both sides later agreed to precise definition of "heavy" ICBM's,
in a final case the USSR ceased the activity the US had considered
as violating past treaties. The State Dept. Report also dealt with
14 popular allegations of cheating by the USSR that had never been
brought before the SCC and reported in every case that there has
been no Soviet cheating. In several instances what was alleged as
"cheating" is actually REQUIRED by arms agreements! No wonder then
that even Evans and Novak are forced to report "Reagan always has
decided that evidence of cheating has fallen short and pulled back
at the last moment from charging a violation." For good reason-there
have been none! The Soviets, for all their faults , do not want to
be incinerated anymore than we do. So why don't we get together
with the Soviets NOW to stop the arms race?
Tim Sevener
decvax!pur-ee!iuvax!isrnix!timswatt@ittvax.UUCP (Alan S. Watt) (07/16/83)
(sorry if this is old news; I've had such a large backlog to go through) Last month's "Foreign Affairs" has an article about "yellow rain", which is alleged to be a Soviet biological weapon in use in Cambodia and Afganistan. However, this month's "Discover" contains a complaint that the "Foreign Affairs" article didn't have adequate scientific controls to conclude a Soviet bio-weapon was involved -- the particular toxin can occur naturally (which it did on a massive scale in Russia some years ago, which is how they would have found out about it). Such weapons are banned by an agreement which both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. have signed. Personally, I am not willing to go to Afganistan or Cambodia and stand around drinking bottled water and eating freeze-dried foods for a month of "yellow rain" attacks to provide an "adequate control". It is significant that in both of these countries the victims have been in areas under Soviet (or Soviet client) attacks; no deaths from this toxin have been reported in areas under government control. It is also significant that travel for neutral scientists to both areas is either prohibited, or made extremely difficult. The toxins might indeed be occurring naturally, but it stretches my credulity just a bit. The same evidence to support charges of U.S. misbehavior in El Salvador would bring howls of protest from our own and foreign media. - Alan S. Watt